Excuse me, could you tell me in which document I can find the ILO rules on partial strikes? Finally, during a strike, the employer cannot, by force of law, resume his interrupted services by concluding new contracts. Unless the operation of certain units is essential to avoid deterioration of safety, machinery, crops or basic elements. This is then decided by the labour inspector (Art. 449 CST) The matter must also be obtained before the ILO. The CUT was able to assess whether the strike did the same thing as the collective agreement and collective agreements. A year ago, he submitted two structural complaints to the ILO Committee on Freedom of Association, one concerning trade union contracts, in which he blamed the approximately 2,000 trade union contracts that existed in the country at the time, documented them all and presented them as a complaint. And he did the same with the collective pacts, which they all summarized in a single complaint. The second is that the strike is not peaceful. CSE calls an unpeaceful strike illegal. It is a question of defining what is peaceful, because every strike from a material point of view causes damage. For the Supreme Court, a strike that causes damage is no longer peaceful and illegal.
If the strikers kidnap all the workers and close the company, it causes damage, as if they are hanging banners and blocking the entrance; And when they organize rallies, they call them riots. That is, all practices that are normal in strikes today are peaceful and harmful. This is the most common reason in cases of strikes declared illegal by the court. The decision legalizes the strike of the union of workers of the ESE Hospital in San José de Maicao, whose members argued during the trial that the cessation of activities was an “act of human dignity and despair” given the violation of several professional commitments by the institution providing the health service. A strike may be declared illegal if it interferes with the provision of an essential service and there has been no dialogue between the parties. According to the Ordinary Supreme Court, strikes that are not regulated by the Substantive Labour Code in the field of (contractual) collective bargaining, such as those motivated by solidarity, public order or violations committed by the employer, are not subject to prior procedures, such as authorizing the cessation of assembly activities or carrying them out within certain time limits. What is important is that the constitutional guarantee be exercised to defend the economic and social interests of workers. It is a right that is enshrined on a broad front, with the only limit not to suspend essential public services.
They could cooperate with unions that have been declared illegal strikes by the court because the court has distanced itself from ILO recommendations in all cases. It must be said to the Labour Chamber of the Court that many of its judgments are null and void for incompetence, as in the case of Anthoc`s strike, in which it did not have the power to declare it illegal because it was the expression of the protest of the unions and the civic exercise of the mobilization. This will at least allow the Court to reflect on how it will continue to rule on strike cases. With regard to the individual assessment of cases, the Court recalled that other transgressions must be assessed in the middle of illegal days, which may include criminal acts, physical violence, acts of sabotage, destruction of files and documents, disclosure of confidential information and the performance of prohibited acts endangering the life or safety of persons. “These behaviors need to be weighed according to their severity.” “Rather than being an anomalous phenomenon that must be cleaned up or reduced at all costs, strikes are a right undeniably linked to democracy, pluralism and the social rule of law, the exercise of which allows the fair participation of workers in the economic growth of nations and the achievement of social justice and equality. Just as strikes are imposed in a democratic system, respect for the fundamental rights of the Community naturally takes precedence over the right to strike. There are several circumstances that workers and unions can use to try to remove obstacles to the right to strike. The first is that the Constitutional Court has ordered Congress to enact specific regulations for strikes in the public sector. It is a space that opens up discussion. And the impact of restrictions on strikes on the right to organize and bargain collectively, which cannot be achieved without the right to strike, is dramatic.
If the right to strike were not so restricted, the number of collective bargaining would be higher. As the Court held, the debate in this case revolves around the definition of whether the union is on days 20, 21, 22, 23 and 24. May 2013 favoured a concerted stoppage or work stoppage at the company`s workplace and whether it was legal or illegal. COLLECTIVE RIGHTS » COLLECTIVE DISPUTES » STRIKES » TERMS AND CONDITIONS – Difference between the Another violation is related to the fact that CSE prohibits strikes in all public services, even if they are not substantial, there is no regulation for minimum services. Contrary to the ILO resolution, which states that strikes in the public sector cannot be banned, it is necessary to define what constitutes an essential public service and to define concretely what it is. That is to say, not to prohibit the strike, but to restrict it, to guarantee minimum benefits. “Therefore, instead of being the promoters of an illegal condition, these workers are victims who have systematically suffered violations of their fundamental labor rights, violations that also affect the health system, because a healthy workforce portfolio is a necessary element for the proper functioning of the service,” reads the decision.